now at lumiere.net.nz
Ticket Stub Scrawlings #2: Three... Extremes [Part A]
Round #2 of TIM GRAY's annual Ticket Stub Scrawlings sees the Asian Cinema devotee tackle the short film horror triptych Three... Extremes: a three-point collaboration between marquee directors Takashi Miike, Park Chan-wook and Fruit Chan. It screens, along with thirteen other tyrannical films, as part of Ant Timpson's That's Incredible Cinema.
» Part A | [Part B]
KIA ORA and welcome to the Ticket Stub Scrawlings #2, a collection of comments on contemporary cinema showing at a theatre near you. This year, I dissect the Mr. Horror's Opus that is Three... Extremes, a standout from Ant Timpson's That's Incredible Cinema! showcase, with mixed results. Basically, the Scrawlings are not reviews, but rather gut reactions to each of the three shorts by Takashi Miike, Fruit Chan and Park Chan-wook comprising Three... Extremes. As such, they make no attempt to offer a rounded or balanced view of the offerings nor the feature as a whole, but rather provide a space for brief rants on elements of the shorts that provoked a reaction, followed by some arbitrary figures to simplify the relative strengths and weaknesses of them. It breaks down like this:
Basically how nicely the film was shot. A good cinematography score could denote "original perspective" (if pulled off well) or textbook stuff. The art of movie photography is so variable in terms of approach and quality; this just reflects how much I appreciated it. For lack of an editing category or anything like that, the number (out of 10) you see attests to the general cohesion of the images, and the sort of response they can provoke.
An integral part of any film, and quite possibly one most vital to a decent Non-Sequitur Mark out of 100. The quality of the acting will usually carry a movie, and I guess the criteria of this group are mostly self-explanatory. Obviously there are different styles of acting that could all garner hefty scores here...I'm not looking for dramatic thespian, glamorous melodrama or nihilistic post-modern delivery in particular. Nor does the acting have to be especially consistent. A film with one or two standout performances could easily bring a high mark, and one or two talentless actors won't doom the score either.
Sound covers music, sound effects, and pretty much anything you can hear with your body's ear (this category accepts no responsibility for the Voices In Your Head). To score highly here a huge musical score is not required, nor is a flurry of effects to bring you to aural orgasm. As long as these sounds are used to good effect and contribute to the overall impact of a film, a high mark here will not be a problem. Low marks however will go to movies that utilise music particularly inappropriately, or dish out the white noise indiscriminately (nope, not looking at anyone in particular...phew!)
The king of all marks and the standard by which movies are rated, the Non-Sequitur Mark out of 100 is in no way derived from any of the previous criteria, but simply represents my appreciation of any particular movie. This is not only because it's problematic to average out 3 non-exhaustive categories of judgement, but also because the scrawlings are always going to be horribly subjective. These scores do not represent the views of the Lumière staff at large. Disclaim everything, and enjoy >>
» Part A | [Part B]
» Part A | [Part B]
KIA ORA and welcome to the Ticket Stub Scrawlings #2, a collection of comments on contemporary cinema showing at a theatre near you. This year, I dissect the Mr. Horror's Opus that is Three... Extremes, a standout from Ant Timpson's That's Incredible Cinema! showcase, with mixed results. Basically, the Scrawlings are not reviews, but rather gut reactions to each of the three shorts by Takashi Miike, Fruit Chan and Park Chan-wook comprising Three... Extremes. As such, they make no attempt to offer a rounded or balanced view of the offerings nor the feature as a whole, but rather provide a space for brief rants on elements of the shorts that provoked a reaction, followed by some arbitrary figures to simplify the relative strengths and weaknesses of them. It breaks down like this:
Basically how nicely the film was shot. A good cinematography score could denote "original perspective" (if pulled off well) or textbook stuff. The art of movie photography is so variable in terms of approach and quality; this just reflects how much I appreciated it. For lack of an editing category or anything like that, the number (out of 10) you see attests to the general cohesion of the images, and the sort of response they can provoke.
An integral part of any film, and quite possibly one most vital to a decent Non-Sequitur Mark out of 100. The quality of the acting will usually carry a movie, and I guess the criteria of this group are mostly self-explanatory. Obviously there are different styles of acting that could all garner hefty scores here...I'm not looking for dramatic thespian, glamorous melodrama or nihilistic post-modern delivery in particular. Nor does the acting have to be especially consistent. A film with one or two standout performances could easily bring a high mark, and one or two talentless actors won't doom the score either.
Sound covers music, sound effects, and pretty much anything you can hear with your body's ear (this category accepts no responsibility for the Voices In Your Head). To score highly here a huge musical score is not required, nor is a flurry of effects to bring you to aural orgasm. As long as these sounds are used to good effect and contribute to the overall impact of a film, a high mark here will not be a problem. Low marks however will go to movies that utilise music particularly inappropriately, or dish out the white noise indiscriminately (nope, not looking at anyone in particular...phew!)
The king of all marks and the standard by which movies are rated, the Non-Sequitur Mark out of 100 is in no way derived from any of the previous criteria, but simply represents my appreciation of any particular movie. This is not only because it's problematic to average out 3 non-exhaustive categories of judgement, but also because the scrawlings are always going to be horribly subjective. These scores do not represent the views of the Lumière staff at large. Disclaim everything, and enjoy >>
» Part A | [Part B]
